On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:26 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor <[email protected]> wrote: > The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. > > Title: XMPP Compliance Suites 2012 > > Abstract: This document defines XMPP protocol compliance levels for 2012. > > URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/compliance2012.html > > The XMPP Council will decide at its next meeting whether to accept this > proposal as an official XEP. > >
Some thoughts: Why is BOSH included in the list when we say "* Support can be enabled via an external component or an internal server module/plugin."? Any XMPP compliant server would pass that, so there's no point in making this an explicit item. RFC 6122 is missing. I'm assuming the XSF is using the compliance XEPs as a tool to encourage implementation. If that is correct, then: There's a case to be made for caps support for Advanced Server, as some servers do flood users with PEP without taking caps into account. What is the case for Chat State Notifications for Advanced Client? I mean it's useful, just like a hundred other XEPs, but is it useful enough to be made into a compliance requirement? Now, things which are missing, but shouldn't be: Working file transfer should be a requirement for Advanced Client. I'm not sure if audio/video support should be a compliance requirement for Advanced Client, but some would think so. And finally, I'd personally like Message Receipts being included in more clients. They make a huge difference when you are on a bad network (e.g., most mobile networks outside of central city areas across the world). -- Waqas Hussain
